Download Gibson v Manchester City Council: Analyzing Binding Agreements & Offers in Contract Law and more Study notes Contract Law in PDF only on Docsity!
Gibson v Manchester City Council G Was a tenant of the council house by MCC. Following year MCC sent letter to G to complete form to purchase house. G sent the letter. MCC changed policy and refused to allow G to purchase the house. G said the contract was binding since he sent the letter. MCC sent the letter ʹ was offer G ʹ sent authorisation letter of consent thus showing agreement to the offer therefore G argued a contract was established MCC argued that they never accepted thus no contract was established for sale of house. Conventional Approach ʹ Lord Diplock Look at the document that was used. Letter simply set out financial terms Found to be no binding agreement. Lord Denning- holistic approach look at the correspondence as a whole and at the conduct of the parties and see therefrom whether the parties have come to an agreement on everything that was material
The Offer communications between the parties
Carlill v Carbolic Smoke Ball Co Unilateral offers CSB ʹ Sold medical devices in this case a smoke ball. Ad shows offer is made Mrs C- used this call from November to January. Contracted flu and claimed the GBP100, company refused. She sued for breach of contract since the ad was clearly an offer to the public. Since she did the conditions stated in the offer, thus showing agreement. CBC argued that it was not an offer, but a mere puff and not meant to be legally binding. She did not communicate the acceptance to CBC. Since the ad was too vague there was no time element, went thru ACIC and argued there was no binding contract. Judgment found Notification of acceptance can occur at the Acceptance of a unilateral offer occurs by same time as performance. performing (^) the condition.held that the plaintiff was entitled to recover the £
Unilateral Offers Mere puff or offer?
MacRobertson v Comm of State Tax Per Barwick CJ Ticket is the receipt Ticket contains terms on which the airline might be willing to carry passenger
Ticket cases
Passenger could offer to be carried on those terms by presenting self to airport Airline could accept the offer by carrying the passenger Held that the airline operator did n passenger ot, by the terms of the ticket 'assume or offer to assume any obligation to carry the intending
Pharmaceutical Society of Great Britain v Boots Cash Chemists Each Boots outlet had a self service system with shelves of stock with prices marked. Cashier would state the total price and receive payment. Supervised by pharmacist. PSGB said it is unlawful since customers were self served Held: goods displayed on counter were invitation to treat and not an offer because they are intended to invite customers to choose what they want and customer makes an offer to purchase them at the counter, when pharmacist supervised sale
Was this an offer which was accepted by unsupervised customer OR Was the offer made the customer at the check out where the pharmacist was? ͞ Would a reasonable person having regard to their external manifestations of conduct, consider the parties to have reached agreement.͟ Smith v Hughes Toll (FGCT) v Alphapharm Fitness First v Chong
Acceptance- objective test
The Crown v Clarke Clarke gave information to clear himself for a false charge of murder, Clarke then claimed the reward money bu crown. He then sued for breach of contract. t was denied by the
Was there an agreement that was constituted by offer and acceptance? Claƌke͛Ɛ aƌgƵmenƚ ǁaƐ ƚhaƚ he gaǀe eǀidence aƚ ƚƌial͕ he inƚended ƚo claim ǁhaƚ ƚhe offeƌ haƐ Ɛƚaƚed͘ ThiƐ ǁaƐ aƌgƵed ƚ o be his subjective intention. Even tho he gave evidence to clear himself not to claim the reward.
Felthouse v Bindley Silence by the offeree will not amount to acceptance Had he sent in agreement and communicated his intention there would be a contract, but since the offeree was silent, there is no contract as such
EXCEPTION to Objective Test approach for acceptance The acceptance must be in response to the offer͟
Acceptance inferred from conduct Silence by the offeree
For the reasons explained by Heydon it needed to be treated as an offer (it wasn't pleaded)
Was the offer accepted? Yes
Was there consideration?
Yes. The offer provided for the establishment of a waste treatment plant that would be in Brambles' interests
